Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Optimized Building Performance”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

280 records · Page 16

Flat H Frangible Joint Evolution

Space vehicle staging and separation events require pyrotechnic devices. They are single-use mechanisms that cannot be tested, nor can failure-tolerant performance be demonstrated in actual flight articles prior to flight use. This necessitates the implementation of a robust design and test approach coupled with a fully redundant, failure-tolerant explosive mechanism to ensure that the system functions even in the event of a single failure. Historically, NASA has followed the single failure-tolerant (SFT) design philosophy for all human-rated spacecraft, including the Space Shuttle Program. Following the end of this program, aerospace companies proposed building the next generation human-rated vehicles with off-the-shelf, non-redundant, zero-failure-tolerant (ZFT) separation systems. Currently, spacecraft and launch vehicle providers for both the Orion and Commercial Crew Programs (CCPs) plan to deviate from the heritage safety approach and NASA's SFT human rating requirements. Both programs' partners have base-lined ZFT frangible joints for vehicle staging and fairing separation. These joints are commercially available from pyrotechnic vendors. Non-human-rated missions have flown them numerous times. The joints are relatively easy to integrate structurally within the spacecraft. In addition, the separation event is debris free, and the resultant pyro shock is lower than that of other design solutions. It is, however, a serious deficiency to lack failure tolerance. When used for critical applications on human-rated vehicles, a single failure could potentially lead to loss of crew (LOC) or loss of mission (LOM)). The Engineering and Safety & Mission Assurance directorates within the NASA Johnson Space Center took action to address this safety issue by initiating a project to develop a fully redundant, SFT frangible joint design, known as the Flat H. Critical to the ability to retrofit on launch vehicles being developed, the SFT mechanisms must fit within the same three-dimensional envelope as current designs as well as meet structural loads requirements. There is increased mass associated with the redundant design, and the goal is to minimize the weight impact as much as possible. These requirements presented significant challenges, both technically and financially; these challenges will be explored in this paper. Perhaps greater than the technical issues confronted during this design process, were the financial considerations. These were a significant part of the story of this design and development plan. Insufficient financial and labor resources were formidable barriers to completing this project. Nevertheless, JSC personnel successfully conducted several test series at JSC with very useful results. The many lessons learned drove design improvements, performance efficiency, and increased functional reliability. This paper examines the significant technical and financial challenges that these requirements posed to the project team. It discusses the evolution of the SFT frangible joint design, including optimization, testing, and successful partnering of the Johnson Space Center (JSC) engineering and JSC safety organizations, to enhance the flight safety margin for America's next generation of human-rated space vehicles.

Diegelman, Thomas E.↗

NASA's Space Launch System Begins Integration, Stacking in Preparation for Artemis I Launch

The Artemis era of human lunar exploration is nearing take-off as NASA’s new super heavy-lift launch vehicle, the Space Launch System (SLS), begins stack-ing and integration operations in mid-2020 at Kennedy Space Center (KSC) in Florida. With a planned upgrade path to progressively more powerful vehicles and availability in crew and cargo configurations, SLS provides a unique and flexible launch solution to send crew, large-scale infrastructure and robotic probes to deep space. The SLS Block 1 vehicle, the initial variant to fly, is optimized for lunar missions with a proven propulsion system consisting of four liquid hydrogen (LH2)/liquid oxygen (LOX)-fed RS-25 engines and twin five-segment solid rocket boosters (SRBs). The Block 1 vehicle can also be outfitted with an industry-standard 5 m-class payload fairing (the “cargo” configuration) and will launch at least 27 metric tons (t) of mass to trans-lunar injection (TLI). SLS is the backbone of NASA’s Artemis program, which will return the agency’s human spaceflight program to the Moon for the first time since 1972. For the Artemis I mission, SLS will send an uncrewed Orion spacecraft to TLI, where it will enter a distant retrograde lunar orbit and fly 38,000 nmi past the Moon – farther than any spacecraft built for humans has ever traveled. The SLS Block 1 vehicle for Artemis I completed manufacturing in 2019. Several elements, including the upper stage, have been delivered to the Exploration Ground Systems (EGS) program at KSC and are being prepped for integration and stack-ing. The five-segment solid rocket boosters – the largest and most powerful ever built for flight – are also complete. The booster motor segments for the Artemis I flight are scheduled to ship from prime contractor Northrop Grumman’s Utah facilities and begin stacking and integration at KSC in June 2020. The SLS core stage is the largest rocket stage NASA has ever built in terms of volume and height, and includes the avionics and the tanks that feed cryogenic propellant to the four RS-25s (formerly Space Shuttle Main Engines [SSMEs]). They have been modified with an updated controller and nozzle insulation to protect them from the hotter launch environment. The SLS core stage is currently being test-ed at NASA’s Stennis Space Center (SSC) in a series of “green run” tests to verify it meets design and performance requirements. Following the green run test series, which is scheduled to culminate with a full-duration hot-fire of the four RS-25 engines, the core stage will ship to KSC and be stacked between the sol-id rocket boosters in the Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB). Integration of the vehicle will continue with the upper stage, known as the Interim Cryogenic Propulsion Stage (ICPS) and the Launch Vehicle Stage Adapter (LVSA) on the core stage. Another adapter, the Orion Stage Adapter (OSA), connects SLS to Orion and provides housing for 13 6U CubeSat payloads manifested on Artemis I. The CubeSats will be released in deep space after Orion separates from the vehicle, and the flight marks the first ride share opportunity for independent small-sats to deep space. The second major SLS variant to come online, Block 1B, replaces the single-engine ICPS with a four-engine LH2/LOX Exploration Upper Stage (EUS). This more powerful upper stage, along with other vehicle up-grades, will enable the Block 1B vehicle to launch 38-42 t to TLI, depending on crew or cargo configuration. The final evolution of the vehicle, Block 2, will onramp evolved solid rocket boosters to increase mass to TLI to 43-46 t, de-pending on crew or cargo configuration. The Block 1B/Block 2 vehicles can be outfitted with an 8.4 m-diameter payload fairing in 19.1 m or 27.4 m lengths, to provide unprecedented volume for payloads. With the initial Block 1 vehicle completely manufactured and the core stage in final testing before shipping to KSC, the SLS Program and its industry partners have made significant progress manufacturing subsequent vehicles. For the second Block 1 vehicle, the solid rocket motor segments are complete, as are the RS-25 engines with controllers. All five major components of the Artemis II core stage – the forward skirt, LOX and LH2 tanks, intertank and engine section – are manufactured and technicians are installing subsystems at NASA’s rocket factory, Michoud Assembly Facility. The RL-10 engine for the Artemis II ICPS is complete and panels have been machined for its LH2 tank. In addition, panels are machined for the vehicle’s two adapters, with welding scheduled to begin in summer 2020. Flight hard-ware is also in production for the third SLS vehicle, with several booster motor segments cast. The pace of development on the EUS has increased, with the goal to complete Critical Design Review (CDR) in December 2020. Several EUS test rings have been machined at Michoud. The EUS is designed to exe-cute a variety of missions – human spaceflight, deployment of deep-space infra-structure, or high-C3 missions to the outer solar system – with crew and cargo configurations available beginning in the mid-2020s. The near-term goal for the nation’s powerful new space exploration asset, however, is to launch the Arte-mis program, and send the first woman and the next man to the lunar surface. At the Astrodynamics Specialist Conference, the SLS program will update the community on the progress of the initial Block 1 vehicle in final green run test-ing, integration and stacking. In addition, this paper will provide an update to the community on the manufacturing status of subsequent Block 1 and Block 1B vehicles.

Steve Creech↗

Coilgun Acceleration Model Containing Interactions Between Multiple Coils

Electromagnetic (EM) accelerators have the potential to fill a performance range not currently being met by conventional chemical and electric propulsion systems by providing a specific impulse of 600-1000 seconds and a thrust-to-power ratio greater than 200 mN/kW. A propulsion system based on EM acceleration of small projectiles has the traditional advantages of using a pulsed system, including precise control over a range of thrust and power levels as well as rapid response and repetition rates. Furthermore, EM accelerators have lower power requirements than conventional electric propulsion systems since no plasma creation is necessary. A coilgun is a specific type of EM device where a high-current pulse through a coil of wire interacts with a conductive projectile via an induced magnetic field to accelerate the projectile. There are no physical or electrical connections to the projectile, which leads to less system degradation and a longer life expectancy. Multi-staging a coilgun by adding multiple turns on a single coil or on the projectile increases the inductance, thus permitting acceleration of the projectile to higher velocities. Previously, a simplified problem of modeling an inductively-coupled, single-coil coilgun using a circuit-based analysis coupled to the one-dimensional momentum equation through Lenz's law was solved; however, the analysis was only conducted on uncoupled coils. The problem is significantly more complicated when multiple, independently-powered coils simultaneously operate and interact with each other and the projectile through induced magnetic fields. This paper presents a multi-coil model developed with the magnetostatic finite element solver QuickField. In the model, mutual inductance values between pairs of conductors were found by first computing the magnetic field energy for different cases where individual coils or multiple coils carry current, then integrating over the entire finite element domain for each case, and finally using the definition of inductive energy storage to solve for the self and mutual inductance. The electric circuit model is coupled to the projectile through Lenz's law, with the coils coupled through mutual inductance but able to be independently triggered at different times to optimize the acceleration profile. This initial model to predict the behavior of a projectile's acceleration through a coupled, multi-coil coilgun increases the potential of building a highly efficient coilgun thruster with key advantages over other EM thruster systems, thus making it a promising candidate for satellite main propulsion or attitude control thrusters.

Liu, Connie↗

SatCORPS Global Cloud Composite (GCC): the Design and Delivery of A High Quality, High Resolution, Global Cloud Product Available in Near-Real Time

The NASA Satellite ClOud and Radiation Property retrieval System (SatCORPS) supports the development of an analysis ready and cloud-optimized data transformation pipeline and geospatial service enablement of a global cloud composite (GCC) product derived from global geostationary satellite imagery. This geospatial service will be available at high temporal and spatial resolution via the SatCORPS web mapping application for visualization and analysis as well as direct ingestion to common geospatial software and custom programming. The resulting global cloud composite products from the processing pipeline can then be geospatially-service enabled as ArcGIS Image Services and Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC) Web Mapping/Coverage Services for visualization and analysis via a web mapping application and common geospatial software. Near real time global observations are created through the composition of five geostationary satellites that provides modelling and forecasting communities with the capability to provide high quality and timely information to start the projection process. The Global Cloud Composite product combines information from geostationary satellites, GOES-16, GOES-17, Himawari-8, Meteosat-11 and Meteosat-9 to create a single global composite netcdf file and images using the different products within the netcdf file. The SatCORPS team, though our Global Cloud Composite (GCC) product and web-based visualization tools including Geographical Information System (GIS) services provide near real time global cloud product information to both automated processes and traditional web users that is timely and high quality derived from geostationary satellites. The Global Cloud Composite product takes advantage of the scalable processing resources provided by the AWS batch service to provide new composites every thirty minutes. Because information from each of the low earth orbiting satellites is available on schedules tuned to the specific satellite, the processing algorithm temporally composites the final dataset as each satellite’s information becomes available. The SatCORPS team has leveraged our experience using Amazon Web Services (AWS) to build a low latency high availability tool that allows end users both human and automated to acquire high quality and high-resolution Geostationary Earth Orbiting (GEO) information at zero cost to the end user. This presentation will describe how we architected and implemented the service as well as lessons learned based on our experiences both developing and operating the system. The lessons learned include how we integrated multiple services including Amazon Batch, Amazon S3 and Amazon Lambda service to create a low cost but high-performance processing system that is capable of identifying and processing the most appropriate satellite overpass information into global cloud composites. We will also describe our web-based tools including our Geographic Information System that can be used for visualization and analysis. The products from the processing can be geospatially-service enabled as ArcGIS Image Services and Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC) Web Mapping/Coverage Services for visualization and analysis via a web mapping application and common geospatial software. The SatCORPS Global Composite Cloud product provides sophisticated global composited cloud research products with very low latency that we see that as filling a rapidly growing need in the research and modelling community with no up-front nor ongoing costs associated with downloading or using the information.

AWS AMCE SMCE GCC SATCORPS GLOBAL CLOUD COMPOSITE ↗

Initial Development of A Digital Twin Model for an Electrified Aircraft Propulsion Emulation Rig

In support of aviation fuel burn and emission reduction goals, NASA is pursing high-payoff research investments that promise to transform aviation. This includes investments in Electrified Aircraft Propulsion (EAP), which relies on the generation, storage, transmission, and use of electrical power for producing thrust and optimizing propulsion system efficiency. Multiple technology challenges must be addressed to unlock the full potential of EAP. This includes advances in propulsion controls, which will be vital for ensuring coordinated efficient operation of the complex integrated subsystems that comprise EAP architectures. To support EAP controls research, the NASA Glenn Research Center has developed the Hybrid Propulsion Emulation Rig (HyPER). The HyPER laboratory hardware includes shaft-mounted electric machines, power converters, power supplies, power distribution cables, and an energy storage device that can be reconfigured to represent a variety of EAP architectures. It also includes an integrated real-time computer system that hosts developed EAP control software and turbomachinery simulations. This enables the electrical system and rotating shafts of EAP designs to be implemented in actual hardware and integrated with turbomachinery simulations and system-level EAP control logic implemented in software. In this form, the HyPER laboratory provides a partially simulated, partially hardware-in-the-loop test environment enabling the initial development and evaluation of EAP control technology. A prerequisite for the development of EAP control designs is the availability of a system model that accurately reflects the operation of the electrical system hardware. To support this need, a digital twin model of the HyPER electrical system hardware is under development. This model is being coded in the MATLAB Simulink environment and uses the NASA-developed Electrical Modeling and Thermal Analysis Toolbox (EMTAT) to construct a digital twin framework. EMTAT contains generic electrical component building blocks that are simulated at turbomachinery timescales. Associated inputs and outputs allow the blocks to be combined to model complete electrical systems. The EMTAT blocks also contain adjustable internal maps and parameters that can be set to reflect the operation of a specific electrical component. For the HyPER digital twin, the settings of these EMTAT block internal maps and parameters is determined through machine learning approaches applied to characterization run data collected from the laboratory. During characterization runs the laboratory electrical system hardware is subjected to a full range of torque, speed, and power settings. Acquired data is then used to estimate EMTAT block parameters using a variety of machine learning techniques. The resulting digital twin model is found to match the operation of actual HyPER hardware with an accuracy suitable for control development purposes. It also holds promise for other applications including modeling the performance of HyPER laboratory reconfigurations and model-based anomaly detection. Planned follow-on work to automate post-processing of acquired laboratory data to update the HyPER digital twin model will also be presented and discussed.

Electrified Aircraft Propulsion↗

Imagery Integration Team

The Human Exploration Science Office (KX) provides leadership for NASA's Imagery Integration (Integration 2) Team, an affiliation of experts in the use of engineering-class imagery intended to monitor the performance of launch vehicles and crewed spacecraft in flight. Typical engineering imagery assessments include studying and characterizing the liftoff and ascent debris environments; launch vehicle and propulsion element performance; in-flight activities; and entry, landing, and recovery operations. Integration 2 support has been provided not only for U.S. Government spaceflight (e.g., Space Shuttle, Ares I-X) but also for commercial launch providers, such as Space Exploration Technologies Corporation (SpaceX) and Orbital Sciences Corporation, servicing the International Space Station. The NASA Integration 2 Team is composed of imagery integration specialists from JSC, the Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC), and the Kennedy Space Center (KSC), who have access to a vast pool of experience and capabilities related to program integration, deployment and management of imagery assets, imagery data management, and photogrammetric analysis. The Integration 2 team is currently providing integration services to commercial demonstration flights, Exploration Flight Test-1 (EFT-1), and the Space Launch System (SLS)-based Exploration Missions (EM)-1 and EM-2. EM-2 will be the first attempt to fly a piloted mission with the Orion spacecraft. The Integration 2 Team provides the customer (both commercial and Government) with access to a wide array of imagery options - ground-based, airborne, seaborne, or vehicle-based - that are available through the Government and commercial vendors. The team guides the customer in assembling the appropriate complement of imagery acquisition assets at the customer's facilities, minimizing costs associated with market research and the risk of purchasing inadequate assets. The NASA Integration 2 capability simplifies the process of securing one-of-a-kind imagery assets and skill sets, such as ground-based fixed and tracking cameras, crew-in the-loop imaging applications, and the integration of custom or commercial-off-the-shelf sensors onboard spacecraft. For spaceflight applications, the Integration 2 Team leverages modeling, analytical, and scientific resources along with decades of experience and lessons learned to assist the customer in optimizing engineering imagery acquisition and management schemes for any phase of flight - launch, ascent, on-orbit, descent, and landing. The Integration 2 Team guides the customer in using NASA's world-class imagery analysis teams, which specialize in overcoming inherent challenges associated with spaceflight imagery sets. Precision motion tracking, two-dimensional (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) photogrammetry, image stabilization, 3D modeling of imagery data, lighting assessment, and vehicle fiducial marking assessments are available. During a mission or test, the Integration 2 Team provides oversight of imagery operations to verify fulfillment of imagery requirements. The team oversees the collection, screening, and analysis of imagery to build a set of imagery findings. It integrates and corroborates the imagery findings with other mission data sets, generating executive summaries to support time-critical mission decisions.

Calhoun, Tracy↗

An Overview of Experiments and Modeling of Polysiloxane-Coated Thermal Protection Systems for Missions to Mars, Titan, and Beyond.

Phenolic Impregnated Carbon Ablator (PICA) gained heritage during the historic Stardust mission, where it successfully returned samples from a comet’s tail and has since been instrumental in delivering payloads to the surface of Mars [1-3]. Most recently, PICA enabled the safe return of samples collected from asteroid Bennu as part of the OSIRIS-REx mission. This rich legacy underscores PICA’s critical role in allowing NASA’s most ambitious exploration missions. However, the friable nature of its phenolic phase presents challenges during handling and pre-launch activities. To mitigate this issue, PICA is coated with a polysiloxane resin system, which serves to suppress particulate dispersion and thereby safeguard spacecraft components. A comprehensive understanding of the polysiloxane resin’s behavior is imperative, as it profoundly shapes the material response of PICA during atmospheric entry by influencing its thermal and oxidative stability. This influence extends to thermocouple plugs embedded within thermal protection systems. These plugs have demonstrated their significance in missions such as Mars Science Laboratory (MSL) and Mars 2020, where the MEDLI and MEDLI2 instrumentation suites delivered in-valuable insights into the performance of thermal protection systems during entry into the Martian atmosphere [4]. Looking ahead, missions such as Dragonfly, set to descend into Titan’s dense atmosphere, aim to leverage advanced sensor technologies to further refine our understanding of thermal protection response [5]. Moreover, thermocouple plugs play an essential role in validating cutting-edge material response models, such as those pioneered under NASA’s Entry Systems Modeling Project (ESM), designed, in-part, to predict the operational integrity of thermal protection systems under the extreme stresses of atmospheric entry. To achieve these modeling goals, ground-based experiments are crucial to provide the foundational data necessary for developing and refining these predictive tools. To this end, an extensive test campaign was conducted at the Hypersonic Materials Environmental Test System (HyMETS) to investigate the high-temperature behavior of the polysiloxane resin in an air environment [6]. These experiments revealed critical phenomena, including the formation of a silicon oxycarbide layer that enhances oxidation resistance, moderates surface temperatures, and alters in-depth thermal response. Building on these findings, subsequent tests were designed to simulate atmospheric entry conditions in reactive gases, such as CO2 and N2, to mimic the environments of Mars and Titan, respectively, as well as non-reactive gases representing the atmospheres of the Ice Giants (Neptune and Uranus). A heating rate dependent decomposition mechanism has been identified for the polysiloxane resin under oxidizing conditions (Fig. 1). In the initial stage, the resin and the underlying thermal protection system undergo pyrolysis, rapidly generating a thin amorphous silicon oxycarbide interwoven with carbonaceous char and residual fibers from PICA. During the second stage, the nascent oxide layer establishes a robust, oxidation-resistant thermal barrier coating, which significantly impedes heat transfer to the underlying carbonaceous char, resulting in a stagnation of the surface temperature. A key factor contributing to this thermal resistance is the low recombination efficiency of atomic oxygen (γ), which further diminishes the heat load on the material’s interior layers [7]. Moreover, as the surface temperature stagnates, the silicon oxycarbide phase separates into distinct regions of silica and free graphite. Ultimately, when the heat flux reaches a critical threshold, a third stage is triggered, leading to the breakdown of the coating through carbothermal reduction, exposing the underlying char layer. This exposure leads to a dramatic surface temperature spike, driven by highly exothermic reactions between atomic oxygen and the char layer, further accelerating material degradation. A detailed mass and heat transfer model of PICA coated with polysiloxane resin was implemented in the Porous material Analysis Toolbox based on OpenFOAM, PATO [8]. The initial stage was considered negligible in this model because the resin decomposition occurs rapidly within a thin surface layer. Instead, the coating was directly considered as an oxygen-resistant thermal barrier coating. For the second stage, the thin amorphous silicon oxycarbide was treated as a pure silica surface to simplify the thermochemical behavior. The model ac-counts for surface equilibrium processes using representative elements of the coating-environment system. For the third stage, specific boundary conditions were developed to estimate the onset and progression of the coating removal. Two-dimensional material response simulations were conducted to compare uncoated and coated PICA using boundary conditions calibrated with HyMETS data. Fig. 2 illustrates that the simulations closely align with experimental data, successfully reproducing measured temperature profiles. This work will include the latest advancements in the coating model, including the calibration of recombination of atomic oxygen at the surface during the second phase. These simulated results will be further validated against additional CO2 data points from HyMETS, reinforcing the models’ predictive capabilities. These mechanisms and their effects on thermal protection systems, including thermochemical behavior and thermocouple probe performance in extreme environments, provide crucial insights for optimizing spacecraft designs that safeguard scientific payload and ensure mission success in future planetary exploration endeavors.

Active Oxidation↗

SMEX-Lite Modular Solar Array Architecture

For the most part, Goddard solar arrays have been custom designs that are unique to each mission. The solar panel design has been frozen prior to issuing an RFP for their procurement. There has typically been 6-9 months between RFP release and contract award, followed by an additional 24 months for performance of the contract. For Small Explorer (SMEX) missions, with three years between mission definition and launch, this has been a significant problem. The SMEX solar panels have been sufficiently small that the contract performance period has been reduced to 12-15 months. The bulk of this time is used up in the final design definition and fabrication of flight solar cell assemblies. Even so, it has been virtually impossible to have the spacecraft design at a level of maturity sufficient to freeze the solar panel geometry and release the RFP in time to avoid schedule problems with integrating the solar panels to the spacecraft. With that in mind, the SMEX-Lite project team developed a modular architecture for the assembly of solar arrays to greatly reduce the cost and schedule associated with the development of a mission- specific solar array. In the modular architecture, solar cells are fabricated onto small substrate panels. This modular panel (approximately 8.5" x 17" in this case) becomes the building block for constructing solar arrays for multiple missions with varying power requirements and geometrical arrangements. The mechanical framework that holds these modules together as a solar array is the only mission-unique design, changing in size and shape as required for each mission. There are several advantages to this approach. First, the typical solar array development cycle requires a mission unique design, procurement, and qualification including a custom qualification panel. With the modular architecture, a single qualification of the SMEX-Lite modules and the associated mechanical framework in a typical configuration provided a qualification by similarity to multiple missions. It then becomes possible to procure solar array modules in advance of mission definition and respond quickly and inexpensively to a selected mission's unique requirements. The solar array modular architecture allows the procurement of solar array modules before the array geometry has been frozen. This reduces the effect of procurement lead-time on the mission integration and test flow by as much as 50%. Second, by spreading the non-recurring costs over multiple missions, the cost per unit area is also reduced. In the case of the SMEX-Lite procurement, this reduction was by about one third of the cost per unit area compared to previous SMEX mission-unique procurements. Third, the modular architecture greatly facilitates the infusion of new solar cell technologies into flight programs as these technologies become available. New solar cell technologies need only be fabricated onto a standard-sized module to be incorporated into the next available mission. The modular solar array can be flown in a mixed configuration with some new and some standard cell technologies. Since each module has its own wiring terminals, the array can be arranged as desired electrically with little impact to cost and schedule. The solar array modular architecture does impose some additional constraints on systems and subsystem engineers. First, they must work with discrete solar array modules rather than size the array to fit exactly within an available envelope. The array area is constrained to an integer multiple of the module area. Second, the modular design is optimized for space radiation and thermal environments not greatly different from a typical SMEX LEO environment. For example, a mission with a highly elliptical orbit (e.g., Polar, SMEX/FAST) would require thicker coverglasses to protect the solar cells from the more intense radiation environment.

Lyons, John↗

Monitoring Airspace Complexity and Determining Contributing Factors

The national airspace has evolved over many years to accommodate increased traffic demand [1] while simultaneously maintaining one of the safest forms of transportation [2], [3]. One of the reasons for this success is the ability of the system and the operators to adapt and accommodate to situations that routinely disrupt optimal operations. These situations may include: adverse weather, delays, early arrivals, equipment outages, and other factors that are outside the operators ability to control. These factors can lead to states where automation is unable to properly handle these issues and therefore air traffic controllers and pilots have to intervene, ultimately increasing communication between operators resulting in higher workload. As controller workload increases to handle sub-optimal operating conditions this can be viewed as an increase in complexity. The reasoning for this is because humans are now required to make tactical decisions in response to external factors, resulting in a departure from the strategic plan where operations would be more efficiently managed. Human operators control airspace complexity under rigid regulations that are constantly changing. The airspace is divided into sectors and the number of aircraft assigned to each controller is limited for safe handling. There has been past work that devised airspace complexity metrics in commercial aviation and related these metrics to controller workload (e.g., [4],[5]). The upper bounds on the system load are pre-determined. Such bounds on complexity make for a safe system, but the system cannot scale and adapt to autonomous, dense, and heterogeneous traffic, including the many types of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) envisioned to be added to the operations. We hypothesize that, as traffic density and heterogeneity grow, and other key metrics change, there will be phase transitions at which the way traffic should be managed changes significantly [6]. We offer a method for in-time detection of contributing factors that lead to phase transitions, characterized by increased complexity. To the best of our knowledge, there is no tool similar to our proposed effort that identifies such contributing factors or precursor patterns. To define the scope we are proposing to measure complexity from the viewpoint of the Terminal Radar Approach Control Facilities (TRACON) controller’s perspective. In particular we are analyzing arrivals into KSFO. With safety as the top concern for airspace operators, it is important to recognize that as density and heterogeneity grow, the focus of the system will change. Times of the day when the airspace has low density and heterogeneity, the flights will follow more efficient paths where the aircraft move on established routes that are more or less directly to the destination. However, when density and heterogeneity increases, the system will begin changing focus to avoiding conflicts and collisions and route the flights in a more flexible way. Higher flexibility requires more communication and coordination between controllers and pilots which the current automation is unable to handle. This paper proposes a novel approach that monitors airspace complexity at multiple scales, uses a Machine Learning-based tool that predicts when operations will transition to a regime of greater complexity, and identifies actions that can reduce the complexity while still maintaining efficient and safe operations. We demonstrate our proposed approach using data from multiple complementary sources. This includes, but is not limited to: historical aircraft surveillance data from NASA’s Sherlock Data Warehouse [7], METAR weather data, and airport configuration data from Aviation System Performance Metrics (ASPM). The surveillance data flight paths are sampled at a variable sample rate — increasing as the aircraft approaches the airport. This is due to how Sherlock manages flight track stitching between different radar facilities which have different sampling rates. The weather and performance data are logged at defined intervals throughout the day at a courser refresh rate. In addition to the logged data and metrics, we leverage pre-defined Standard Terminal Arrival Routes (STARs) procedures to characterize the path of each flight. Each flight files for one of these routes in the flight plan well before entering the terminal airspace, and approximately follows the route until it leaves the STAR, typically on the final fix of a runway transition. However, most flights do not always fly the full STAR procedure to completion [8], but the majority do adhere to the fixes within the common route of the procedure. Our approach leverages fixes in the common route of each of the STARs to build a reference path to the airport. This allows us to characterize the flight paths in what we are defining as the “maneuvering area” (the airspace between the STAR and before the flight is lined up on the runway’s final approach) to determine how off nominal the flights are to calculate its complexity score. Determining airspace complexity is a concept that does not have a concrete answer. In designing this metric, we consider what increases the workload for the air traffic controllers. Consequently more specialized vectoring maneuvers results in higher workload. Accordingly, we start with a theory: each flight has a direct path it takes from the STAR’s common route to the final approach’s outer marker fix for the flight’s landing runway. It is important to note that the direct path is only used as a reference. If the majority of the flights have a large consistent offset as compared to other routes it does not necessarily mean that those flights have higher complexity. We are merely building a distribution based on this direct path for that particular STAR and runway pair to determine the normal mode of operations for that route. Flights that are in the upper tail of these distributions will result in higher complexity scores and flights that fly in the median will represent the normal mode of operations and therefore will have lower complexity scores. Since flights following each STAR route take different paths to the airport, we have a different distribution for each STAR route and therefore can model these distributions to compute a complexity score from their respective normalized distributions. To evaluate the effectiveness of our proposed airspace complexity metric we will compare against an established approach based on trajectory clustering [9]. This unsupervised learning technique consists of the following steps: (1) identify the general maneuvering areas (waypoints) by performing $\kappa$-means or DBSCAN clustering on locations where aircraft frequently turn based on the surveillance radar track data, (2) map flight trajectories onto sequences of waypoints, and (3) cluster the sequences based on their common subsequences. From a high-level perspective, this baseline model learns nominal operations in the airspace through the sequence of waypoints that are representative of where aircraft change direction and defines deviations from the nominal operations as “complex.” Therefore, more deviations from the nominal operations correspond to higher complexity values. For our validation, we re-implemented this technique and tune model hyper-parameters to correctly detect waypoints for the arrival traffic into the San Francisco bay area. We will compute the complexity measure over a one-year period using our proposed technique as well as the baseline. Our validation will be based on each technique’s ability to detect a set of undesirable outcomes (e.g., go-arounds, holding patterns, average time in the airspace, etc.). Since our current complexity metric is derived from the offset from the direct reference path, it’s important to understand what causes these offsets. In many of the flights with high offset distance, flights performing holding patterns and S turns can be observed. These maneuvering tactics are utilized to add distance between the aircraft and the destination runway to prevent multiple flights from having conflicting arrival times. In order to predict a rise in complexity (or the precursor to complexity), it’s necessary to be able to identify these potential conflicts (which in turn, result in higher offsets). To do this, we define a “representative flight” for each STAR route and runway pair. This flight is approximately the path the flight would take if there was a clear path with no other flights in the airspace — including the time remaining to the airport. We first identify the flights for a given STAR runway pair using the offset to the reference path distributions that fall between the 44-55 percentiles. This yields the flights that conform to the most normal mode of operation. Each of these flights is partitioned based on the percent complete from the entry point into the maneuvering areas from 0\% – 100\% complete. Then for each percent “bin”, we take the median value of the flight’s latitude/longitude coordinates, airspeed, and (non causal) time remaining to the airport to construct a lookup table for each percent complete bin on a given route. As a flight enters the maneuvering area, we can find the estimated arrival time of a flight to the airport by finding the closest point to the representative path’s percent complete bin (relative to the flight’s current position at any snapshot in the airspace) and therefore retrieve the corresponding remaining time left on the “representative path”. We assume that the flight will follow the representative path to completion when deriving these estimates. We can then compare these estimated arrival times against other flights for the same snapshot in time to identify potential conflicts. If more flights are estimated to arrive within a tolerance window than there are runways available, then we have a potential conflict. We can use this derived measure along with other factors expected to add disruption to the operation such as weather and runway configuration changes as an input to machine learning tools to detect precursors that increases in our complexity measure. This novel method will assist in uncovering insights into the contributing factors that lead to increased complexity that may allow for in-time responses to avoid reaching a high complexity state in the airspace.

complexity↗

Autonomous Ocean World Exploration: Advancement of a Virtual Testbed

The search for life (extinct or extant) and potentially habitable bodies in our solar system and beyond is one of the 12 priority science questions outlined in the National Acadamies’ 2022 decadal survey [5]. Extraterrestrial destinations containing liquid water present an opportunity to search for life as we know it, and in recent years an increasing number of such locations have been discovered within our solar system. Several Jovian moons—Europa, Ganymede, and Callisto [10]—and the Saturnian moons Enceladus [8] and Titan [9] are known or suspected to harbor massive subsurface oceans. Of these "ocean worlds", Europa is the focus of at least one planned NASA orbiter mission, Europa Clipper [4], and an early lander mission concept, the Europa Lander [2, 3]. Whereas most robotic missions to the Moon and Mars (e.g. orbiters, rovers, landers) to date have had ground controllers on Earth tightly involved in mission operations, missions to more distant worlds will require a high degree of onboard autonomy due to long communication lags and blackouts, harsh environments (radiation, cold), and more limited battery and hardware life. The past decade has seen great advances in both AI technologies and computing scalability and performance that offer promising solutions for spacecraft autonomy and motivate the software system and research programs described in this paper. The Ocean Worlds Autonomy Testbed for Exploration, Research, and Simulation (OceanWATERS) [1], which has been in development at the NASA Ames Research Center since 2018, is a virtual environment for testing lander autonomy solutions. It is built on the Robot Operating System (ROS), runs on consumer-grade Linux workstations, and was released as open source in 2020. OceanWATERS provides a physical and visual simulation of a prototypical lander in a Europa-like environment (Figure 1). The lander was modeled after requirements and specifications made in JPL’s Europa Lander Study of 2016 [3]. Simulated lander systems include stereo cameras and spotlights mounted on an antenna mast that pans and tilts, a 6 degrees of freedom (DoF) robotic arm with a force-torque sensor and two interchangeable end effectors, and a battery pack power system. The environment consists of multiple terrain models including a highly detailed model sourced from the FROST dataset [11], simulation of surrounding planetary bodies based on an ephemeris model, and lighting from the sun with associated surface illumination, reflectance, and shadows. Operations supported by OceanWATERS include panoramic and directed imaging of the environment and lander workspace, Cartesian and joint-level arm commanding, grinding of the terrain surface (e.g. digging a trench), and scooping of ground material (Figure 2) which can be discarded or collected as science samples in a receptacle that can be emptied (science operations themselves are not simulated). These operations are realized as ROS Actions and are complimented by a wide selection of telemetry that is continually produced by each lander subsystem. The power system model is driven by the open-source Generic Software Architecture for Prognostics (GSAP) [11] that predicts the battery’s remaining useful life and other characteristics. As a testbed for high-level autonomy, OceanWATERS provides an execution framework based on PLEXIL [12], an open-source plan specification language and execution engine developed largely at Ames. NASA's initial development of OceanWATERS, as well the Ocean Worlds Lander Autonomy Testbed (OWLAT) [6], a complimentary physical testbed developed at JPL, was the first step in a plan for realizing candidate onboard autonomy solutions for such planetary landers. In 2020 NASA solicited applications for its Autonomous Robotics Research for Ocean Worlds (ARROW) program, and in 2021 the similar Concepts for Ocean worlds Life Detection Technology (COLDTech) program. Collectively six research teams, based in universities and companies across the United States, were awarded grants to develop and demonstrate autonomy solutions on OceanWATERS and OWLAT. These 1–2-year projects have now finished or are nearing completion, and a wide variety of autonomy challenges in ocean world surface missions were addressed. Prototyped and demonstrated solutions have included autonomous discovery, response and adaptation to system faults and unexpected environmental events, world model synthesis through perception, plan synthesis using learned models, methods to optimize sample target selection and prioritize science data transmission, extension of PLEXIL for stochastic decision-making, and an integration of a model of JPL’s mission-ready COLDArm [7]. Technologies used in these projects include many forms of machine learning, causal reasoning, automated planning, Markov decision processes, formal methods, and other advanced techniques. A more detailed summary of the ARROW and COLDTech projects is given herein. OceanWATERS has had significant enhancements since its open-source release in 2020. Many of its new features were driven or shaped by feedback from the ARROW and COLDTech teams and requirements of their projects. In support of enabling autonomous adaptation to spacecraft faults (a specific capability solicited by both programs), a fault injection and detection framework was developed that supports a wide and growing range of fault types such as locked joints, image loss, and battery failures. The power system model was completed and integrated into the simulator, starting as a single-cell battery model and later upgraded to a multi-cell model with associated faults such as cell disconnection. Arm/terrain interaction was improved by adding a force-torque sensor and associated faults, and an analytic dig force model based on the Balovnev bucket force equations. Environment fidelity was increased by modeling terrain deformation resulting from digging and scooping; visual improvements were made in textures, lighting, and shadows. To facilitate interoperation with OWLAT, a unified command and telemetry interface between the testbeds was developed at the ROS level, along with a PLEXIL interface. The number of lander operations was greatly expanded (e.g. with Cartesian-based arm and antenna movement), and a framework was designed for users to build their own lander actions. A GUI for PLEXIL plan selection was created (Figure 3), and an expansive set of plans were added, such as those that illustrate patterns for fault handling. This paper provides a self-contained high-level description of OceanWATERS, focusing on more detailed coverage of the aforementioned enhancements. It provides a high-level summary of the projects undertaken by participants in the ARROW and COLDTech programs and how these efforts have helped shape OceanWATERS. Finally, potential future work and directions for the testbed are listed, as likely informed by the recent planetary science decadal survey [5].

K Michael Dalal↗